If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You're wrong sir. It's because he didn't let Jesus into his heart, you brought the holy ghost with him? Maybe? And then I'm pretty sure the devil anally raped him, injecting into his body the evil semen of murderers, which caused him to go on a murderous rampage. This is what happens to all murderers. Then afterwards, they join the illuminati, and take Big Foot to go and ride the Loch Ness monster to Narnia.

Of course, if he was a Christian, he wasn't really one. He was a cultural Christian, not a real one. This is a simple explanation for every Christian who does a bad thing. They weren't really Christians, despite actually reading and following the bible, they aren't real Christians.

This is a much more plausible explanation than he was simply a sick man. Gotta learn your stuff my friend...

I must be behind on my scripture, because im a bit confused.

Arent you a Christian until you pull the trigger? Or is it when you are planning the attack? Are you still a Christian if you miss your shots? How about if your gun jams on the first shot of an attack, still good with Jesus? How about if you commit a massacre, but no one recognizes you, still considered Christian? Would you enter double negative points for Christianity if your planned killing occured on a Sunday? Speaking of that, how much credit of Christianity do you have to build up in order to have a believable conversion after a horrific attack? Because getting a number figure on that would make things easier.

And PLEASE Locke, lets not exaggerate...the Loch Ness monster wouldnt be caught dead with a heathen. Hes(or she) is a dinosaur and the only person the dinosaurs let ride them was Jesus. I learned that from a Louisiana private school that receives public funding:

So because he doesn't go to church anymore, but still believe in the Christian way of life, that absolves him of all Christian teachings? Whatever helps you sleep at night. The complete denial by some of you Christians is bordering on insanity...

religion wise it doesn't he believed he was the Joker if you want to count that as a religous belief I'm not defending Athiest or Religious people I think there both hypocrites when it comes to violence.

His views on morality directly stem from his atheism; so if he believes no god owns him and therefore he can dictate his own morality and then proceeds to act upon that by killing a dozen people you donít think thatís relevant?

Originally Posted by JCane

Are you seriously wanting to misinterpret everything that people say?

OP made it out like Christians don't kill people out of pure stupidity.

Here's a list.

Youíre trying to compare two completely different situations. When someone who professes to be a Christian kills innocent people they are acting in a manner that is inconsistent with their religion since shedding innocent blood is a direct violation of Godís law. When an atheist kills someone he or she is not acting in a manner that is inconsistent with their atheism because atheism has no overarching rules of morality. So a very good argument could be made that godlessness can certainly lead to violence.

Originally Posted by Locke

So because he doesn't go to church anymore, but still believe in the Christian way of life, that absolves him of all Christian teachings? Whatever helps you sleep at night. The complete denial by some of you Christians is bordering on insanity...

A person calling themselves a Christian doesnít make them a Christian any more than me calling myself an attorney automatically makes me an attorney, those terms have meaning. In the Norwegianís manifesto he describes himself as a ďCultural ChristianĒ, which is a term many secular Europeans (including Dawkins) use to announce that they adhere to the ethical and cultural structures created by Christianity. This however does not make any of them religious Christians because they do not believe Christ was the son of God and God incarnate. In the Norwegianís manifesto he says he doesnít believe God exists and is a staunch Darwinist. So how can someone believe Christ is the son of God and God incarnate but also believe God doesnít exist? The guy was not a Christian.

Originally Posted by Spesh

Oh, ok, so this is all about belief correct? Fair enough: his belief was that he was the Joker.

Originally Posted by Spesh

Im fairly certain next week he will believe he's Joan of Arc. Followed by Charlemagne. After that Mario Williams.

The guys personal belief system had very little to do with his massacre. What it had to do with is his medical condition. He was a nutjob who, for whatever reason, couldnt get adequate treatment. The treatment he was receiving clearly wasnt working.

I think youíre letting him off a bit easy there. The guy obviously knew what he was doing, and will be deemed competent to stand trial. I think his atheistic views on morality had more to do with what he did than dying his hair orange.

Originally Posted by tylerdolphin

Stalin didnt murder 50M people because he was an atheist. he murder 50M people for the same reason Christians have murdered peopled for the last 2000 years...to retain unconditional power.

I am sorry; I canít let you get away with that. Atheists always like to pretend that their atheism somehow exists in a vacuum and doesnít affect any of their actions. If Stalin wanted power, and didnít believe that any god owned him, namely that he was solely accountable for his own actions and there wouldd be no repercussions for his actions then this certainly fueled what he did. Itís completely legitimate to say that Stalinís murderous behavior was a direct result of his atheism. Think about what you are saying, itíd be like if a group of students didnít believe their teacher existed and were constantly causing problems in the classroom. You certainly wouldnít say then, ďwell their misbehavior doesnít have anything to do with the fact they donít believe the teacher even exists, it has everything to do with the fact they just want to misbehave.Ē Even more disturbing is the fact that if atheism were true then Stalin completely got away with what he did and will never receive any form of justice; itís a relief it is not true.

Total DepravityUnconditional ElectionLimited AtonementIrresistible GracePerseverance of the Saints

His views on morality directly stem from his atheism; so if he believes no god owns him and therefore he can dictate his own morality and then proceeds to act upon that by killing a dozen people you donít think thatís relevant?

Youíre trying to compare two completely different situations. When someone who professes to be a Christian kills innocent people they are acting in a manner that is inconsistent with their religion since shedding innocent blood is a direct violation of Godís law. When an atheist kills someone he or she is not acting in a manner that is inconsistent with their atheism because atheism has no overarching rules of morality. So a very good argument could be made that godlessness can certainly lead to violence.

A person calling themselves a Christian doesnít make them a Christian any more than me calling myself an attorney automatically makes me an attorney, those terms have meaning. In the Norwegianís manifesto he describes himself as a ďCultural ChristianĒ, which is a term many secular Europeans (including Dawkins) use to announce that they adhere to the ethical and cultural structures created by Christianity. This however does not make any of them religious Christians because they do not believe Christ was the son of God and God incarnate. In the Norwegianís manifesto he says he doesnít believe God exists and is a staunch Darwinist. So how can someone believe Christ is the son of God and God incarnate but also believe God doesnít exist? The guy was not a Christian.

I think youíre letting him off a bit easy there. The guy obviously knew what he was doing, and will be deemed competent to stand trial. I think his atheistic views on morality had more to do with what he did than dying his hair orange.

I am sorry; I canít let you get away with that. Atheists always like to pretend that their atheism somehow exists in a vacuum and doesnít affect any of their actions. If Stalin wanted power, and didnít believe that any god owned him, namely that he was solely accountable for his own actions and there wouldd be no repercussions for his actions then this certainly fueled what he did. Itís completely legitimate to say that Stalinís murderous behavior was a direct result of his atheism. Think about what you are saying, itíd be like if a group of students didnít believe their teacher existed and were constantly causing problems in the classroom. You certainly wouldnít say then, ďwell their misbehavior doesnít have anything to do with the fact they donít believe the teacher even exists, it has everything to do with the fact they just want to misbehave.Ē Even more disturbing is the fact that if atheism were true then Stalin completely got away with what he did and will never receive any form of justice; itís a relief it is not true.

I have no words. The level of delusion here is on a scale I've never seen in person. And I'm a goddamn clinical psychologist...

If I could take your pain and frame it, and hang it on my wall,
maybe you would never have to hurt again...

I am sorry; I can’t let you get away with that. Atheists always like to pretend that their atheism somehow exists in a vacuum and doesn’t affect any of their actions. If Stalin wanted power, and didn’t believe that any god owned him, namely that he was solely accountable for his own actions and there wouldd be no repercussions for his actions then this certainly fueled what he did. It’s completely legitimate to say that Stalin’s murderous behavior was a direct result of his atheism. Think about what you are saying, it’d be like if a group of students didn’t believe their teacher existed and were constantly causing problems in the classroom. You certainly wouldn’t say then, “well their misbehavior doesn’t have anything to do with the fact they don’t believe the teacher even exists, it has everything to do with the fact they just want to misbehave.” Even more disturbing is the fact that if atheism were true then Stalin completely got away with what he did and will never receive any form of justice; it’s a relief it is not true.

Youre being ridiculous and you know it. Atheism has no doctrine to adhere to. How can anything an atheist does be blamed on atheism? It makes no sense. Sometimes people are just lunatics. I have never once come close to killing a person. Thats mainly because Im not a genocidal lunatic. The fact is, Stalin did what he did because he wanted to retain power over his people and used death and fear of death to accomplish those ends. Many religious people throughout history have done the same thing. Its a fact of life that some people are just evil. Christians have done evil things as well. Often its not because theyre religious...theyre just nuts. Stalin Im pretty sure never thought about the philosophical questions related to his mass murder that you seem to be saying caused it all. He was just a very paranoid, evil man.

You seem like a good enough fellow. If I met you and we never brought up religion, youd never know Im not religious. Im just like any other person. My belief (or lack thereof) in religion has no impact on me doing nutty things. Your religion, believe it or not, also has no impact on you not flying off the deep end. We arent ****ed in the head. Thats all. Your analogy with the teacher falls flat because you assume we need a cosmic babysitter to behave when in reality we dont.

The one part of your post I agree with is that I wish there really was a hell for people like Hitler, Stalin, the theater shooter and all their ilk to burn in.

I have no words. The level of delusion here is on a scale I've never seen in person. And I'm a goddamn clinical psychologist...

Really? That’s all you’ve got? Such a typical arrogant atheist response. “I Can’t refute anything you just said, so I am going to pretend I think it’s just too stupid to respond to and then go find a corner to cry in.” To think you people always pretend you’re the rational ones, but when you’re faced with an actual rational argument all you can respond with is silence, pretty small time.

Youre being ridiculous and you know it. Atheism has no doctrine to adhere to. How can anything an atheist does be blamed on atheism? It makes no sense. Sometimes people are just lunatics. I have never once come close to killing a person. Thats mainly because Im not a genocidal lunatic. The fact is, Stalin did what he did because he wanted to retain power over his people and used death and fear of death to accomplish those ends. Many religious people throughout history have done the same thing. Its a fact of life that some people are just evil. Christians have done evil things as well. Often its not because theyre religious...theyre just nuts. Stalin Im pretty sure never thought about the philosophical questions related to his mass murder that you seem to be saying caused it all. He was just a very paranoid, evil man.

You’re going to have to make up your mind here; do atheists kill people because they are lunatics or because they want power? You seem to want it both ways, I don’t think anyone is going to argue Stalin was a lunatic; he seemed to be a very calculated individual. He knew exactly what he was doing; we can see this in all of his actions, from removing Russian Orthodoxy as the official religion of the Soveit Union and replacing it with atheism, to replacing all orthodox churches with museums and shrines to “human reason”. The guy knew that if he discredited the state religion, then his actions would be viewed as more acceptable by the public because a certain level of moral complacency would develop.

A person’s view on theism is their most fundamental belief. It affects every other belief in their belief system. If a person doesn’t believe god exists, it completely changes the way they view themselves, others, morality, life, death, justice, suffering, purpose, and the list goes on and on. So to say Stalin’s atheism didn’t directly affect his action is imply absurd.

You seem like a good enough fellow. If I met you and we never brought up religion, youd never know Im not religious. Im just like any other person. My belief (or lack thereof) in religion has no impact on me doing nutty things. Your religion, believe it or not, also has no impact on you not flying off the deep end. We arent ****ed in the head. Thats all. Your analogy with the teacher falls flat because you assume we need a cosmic babysitter to behave when in reality we dont.

You seem like a decent enough fellow as well, and I am not trying to take personal shots at you or anything- just simply having a discussion with you. Yes I agree, if we hung out it would most likely be tough to tell which of us is the atheist and which one is the theist. However, if we actually got down to why we do what we do and why we believe what we believe we’d find out that we are very different in those areas.

Out of curiosity, why do you think we don’t need a god in order to behave? I guess a better way of putting it would be, how do we determine what is wrong and right if there is no god?

The one part of your post I agree with is that I wish there really was a hell for people like Hitler, Stalin, the theater shooter and all their ilk to burn in.

There is and they’ll be there someday :- ) Thanks for the interesting discussion!

I think you’re letting him off a bit easy there. The guy obviously knew what he was doing, and will be deemed competent to stand trial. I think his atheistic views on morality had more to do with what he did than dying his hair orange.

He was seeking treatment from mental health professionals for his problem. That same professional warned the school he was unstable. He will undoubtable be locked up for the rest of his life, but its likely it will be in a mental health hospital. And of course you believe its more do to his atheism then it is with his seemingly uncontrollable mental disorder. Then again, religion has been slamming those with unhealthy mental conditions for centuries, so this is nothing new. Lemme guess, to "cure" him he should have been public flogging, right?

Doesnt everyone love it when someone religious tells people what everyone elses beliefs are? You would know all about atheistic morality from your vast experience as one, correct? Which part of his atheistic (non)beliefs do you think caused him to go on a shooting spree, the not raping children part or the not burning women part?

Really? That’s all you’ve got? Such a typical arrogant atheist response. “I Can’t refute anything you just said, so I am going to pretend I think it’s just too stupid to respond to and then go find a corner to cry in.” To think you people always pretend you’re the rational ones, but when you’re faced with an actual rational argument all you can respond with is silence, pretty small time.

You’re going to have to make up your mind here; do atheists kill people because they are lunatics or because they want power? You seem to want it both ways, I don’t think anyone is going to argue Stalin was a lunatic; he seemed to be a very calculated individual. He knew exactly what he was doing; we can see this in all of his actions, from removing Russian Orthodoxy as the official religion of the Soveit Union and replacing it with atheism, to replacing all orthodox churches with museums and shrines to “human reason”. The guy knew that if he discredited the state religion, then his actions would be viewed as more acceptable by the public because a certain level of moral complacency would develop.

A person’s view on theism is their most fundamental belief. It affects every other belief in their belief system. If a person doesn’t believe god exists, it completely changes the way they view themselves, others, morality, life, death, justice, suffering, purpose, and the list goes on and on. So to say Stalin’s atheism didn’t directly affect his action is imply absurd.

You seem like a decent enough fellow as well, and I am not trying to take personal shots at you or anything- just simply having a discussion with you. Yes I agree, if we hung out it would most likely be tough to tell which of us is the atheist and which one is the theist. However, if we actually got down to why we do what we do and why we believe what we believe we’d find out that we are very different in those areas.

Out of curiosity, why do you think we don’t need a god in order to behave? I guess a better way of putting it would be, how do we determine what is wrong and right if there is no god?

There is and they’ll be there someday :- ) Thanks for the interesting discussion!

There's nothing rational about generalizing an entire group of people based on the actions of one. You go and talk about atheists as a group like this, and then try and say something about me not having a rational response? I don't have the patience or the desire to go and refute each and every one of your delusional points. I don't care enough about you to worry about taking the time to do it. Honestly, I simply don't care. You're one person in a segment of the population that has been in steep decline since the early 90s. By the time I'm 50, you evangelicals are going to be such a non-factor, politicians are going to give you as much attention in elections as they currently give all the other religions.

If it makes you feel better to think you "got the better of me", then have at it. It's not like you're lacking in the delusion department...